It’s something I’ve thought a lot about but I feel like I’ve never really seen other people talk about it.
I just pulled out my calipers, my normal thickness string is 1.3mm thick, if I put three layers into the gap that’s 3.9mm of string in the 4.3mm gap on my CLYW Wish.
My XL thickness string is 1.6mm thick, so with the same three layers that’s 4.8mm of string in the 4.5mm gap on my Hydrangea Magnolia.
Now I think the obvious response to this is to use fat thickness string on my Magnolia, something inbetween the normal and XL I have. But in my experience, I feel like I don’t actually get tight and consistent enough binds on my Magnolia even with XL string, so going down to fat string would fix the layering issue but give me even worse binds. Meanwhile normal thickness string on the smaller gap of my Wish has no layering issues and consistently good and tight binds.
There’s a ton of variables at play here like string thickness variance especially as it wears down (the string thicknesses i just measured were from well played strings), the hardness of the response, the size of the response, total yoyo weight, the mmoi of the yoyo, the response wall design, etc.
But in my personal experience I think 4.0-4.3mm gaps with normal thickness string generally provide me with the best bind to snag ratio for the 85-95cm string I use for 5A (I jump around a lot in regard to length lol).
There’s a lot of ways you could approach this, but that’s the logic that led me to where I am.
As an addendum when I’m referring to binds and snags here, I’m not referring to things that would become non-issues with greater 1A yoyo control. I’m referring to things more like this example where the extra layers are coming from active counterweight movement, so the formation is much harder to keep taut. The bind direction (spin is reversed compared to how I’m used to left hand binding in 3A) + being off hand in general means it’s just kinda awkward.
